Dale M. Wheeler wrote;
>Here's another parsing problem where the tools disagree. I've already
>decided for myself, but I'd sure like some second opinions in case I missed
>something obvious (honestly its so I can blame you'all if someone says I've
>made a mistake :-) ):
>
>Is APOKTEINWSIN Pres or Aor Subj (Matt 26:4; Mark 14:1; John 11:53; 12:10;
>Acts 23:12; 27:42; Rev 9:5, 15); or is it possible that some of these are
>Aorist and some are Present ??
>
>Is APOKTEINWMEN Pres or Aor Subj (Matt 21:38; Mark 12:7; Luke 20:14; Acts
>23:14) or some one and some the other ??

Of the 12 forms of the subjunctive of APOKTEINWSIN or APOKTEINWMEN,
Guillemette locates all as present; Mounce locates 1 present and 11 aorist;
Zerwick-Grosvenor 8 aorist and 2 present and 2 as subjunctive w/out
indicating the tense;
I think:
Matt. 26:4 Aorist, It is coupled with what is clearly aorist.
Mark 14:1 This would seem more naturally to be aorist
John 11:53 This would seem more naturally to be aorist
12:10 This would seem more naturally to be aorist
Acts 23:12 This would seem more naturally to be aorist
27:42 This would seem more naturally to be aorist
Rev 9:5, This would seem more naturally to be aorist
15 This one could be present or aorist. (Perhaps iterative present).
Matt 21:38 Aorist, It is coupled with what is clearly aorist.
Mark 12:7 Parallel to the above eg. but not coupled to an aorist. aorist fits.
Luke 20:14 Parallel aorist fits
Acts 23:14 Aorist
I could see all of these as aorist. One or two could with a little twisting
be seen as present.

>One additional note; the NT writers do seem otherwise to have an aversion to
>the use of APOKTEINW in the Present (3x, all ptcs: Matt 23:37; Luke 12:4;
>13:34; the other presents are based on the lemma APOKTENNW [Matt 10:28; Mark
>12:5; 2Cor 3:6; Rev 6:11...there are some textual problems involved]).
>
But only one of the forms of APOKTENNW is indicative, 2 ptcs. 1 inf. That
is not significant.